Well, as an analogy if I hadn't looked at that person a bit funny, they wouldn't have beaten me up. 6 of one, eh.
Confrontation with a motorist: I did nothing wrong this time
- Thread starter Matthew_T
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Well, as an analogy if I hadn't looked at that person a bit funny, they wouldn't have beaten me up. 6 of one, eh.
potsy
Rambler
- Location
- My Armchair
Boris Bajic
Guest
This thread is in danger of striking a discordant note where it might helpfully offer the OP some guidance on how easily quite a nasty situation can develop from a seemingly innocuous one.
There can be a problem with perception if language offering constructive advice to the OP is not couched very carefully.
When Linford said "I'm not in any way condoning the threats the driver made", there is no reason to suppose that is not exactly what he meant. This wording seems to fit perfectly with his other statements.
This statement doesn't preclude the possibility that he also found that the OP's stance or language a contributory factor in the ugliness that followed. That is a separate matter.
Quite a few wise and ancient heads have concluded from the OP's clip that the driving was poor but unremarkable, the behaviour of the driver was quite unacceptable and disgraceful - and the comments of the OP were a contributory factor in the ensuing spat.
Matthew comes across as a decent and sincere character who takes road behaviour very seriously. If only we all did.
He may also be someone who is still picking up the nuances and subtleties that can emerge in dialogue with strangers. There's plenty of helpful guidance contained within this thread. I'm not sure anyone will gain very much by disagreeing ad nauseam about the details of the filmed event.
Matthew, take it easy and keep on enjoying your cycling. Do have a read through the thread at your leisure. I see a lot of thoughtful and good advice in there.
Remember that some of us have been cycling and driving on these and other roads for several decades in a state of relative bliss. We may be utter fools, but there is also the possibility that we've picked up something about how to rub along with other road users.
There can be a problem with perception if language offering constructive advice to the OP is not couched very carefully.
When Linford said "I'm not in any way condoning the threats the driver made", there is no reason to suppose that is not exactly what he meant. This wording seems to fit perfectly with his other statements.
This statement doesn't preclude the possibility that he also found that the OP's stance or language a contributory factor in the ugliness that followed. That is a separate matter.
Quite a few wise and ancient heads have concluded from the OP's clip that the driving was poor but unremarkable, the behaviour of the driver was quite unacceptable and disgraceful - and the comments of the OP were a contributory factor in the ensuing spat.
Matthew comes across as a decent and sincere character who takes road behaviour very seriously. If only we all did.
He may also be someone who is still picking up the nuances and subtleties that can emerge in dialogue with strangers. There's plenty of helpful guidance contained within this thread. I'm not sure anyone will gain very much by disagreeing ad nauseam about the details of the filmed event.
Matthew, take it easy and keep on enjoying your cycling. Do have a read through the thread at your leisure. I see a lot of thoughtful and good advice in there.
Remember that some of us have been cycling and driving on these and other roads for several decades in a state of relative bliss. We may be utter fools, but there is also the possibility that we've picked up something about how to rub along with other road users.
Boris Bajic
Guest
Not keen on the language here, but this does not look good for the OP.
There's a bit in the Bible about he who is without skins getting stoned in the car first or something.
I think it might apply here.
Keep riding Matthew, and keep enjoying it - but watch what you post.
OilyMechanic
Active Member
Linford
Guest
The peanut comment is unneccessary, but what we can recognise is that nobody is perfect. It is part of the human condition to fcuk up from time to time.
The most important thing is that the bloke didn't actually stick the OPs teeth down his throat, and he will live to ride another day. Use the cam to corroborate genuinly dangerous behaviour, and learn to recognise the diffeernce between that and something which is just irritating.
I wonder if having the cam switched on actually acted as a form of risk compensation - in the way people take more chances when wearing a lid.
We can see the corner being cut by Matt, from his own perspective thanks to his camera. What we can't deny is the offence is the same and IMO he cut is more than any of the other riders. If there'd been a cyclist coming the other way, it'd have been squeaky bum time.
So yeah, Matt needs to learn a lesson too.
Now if someone had shouted out on that corner, what reaction do we think Matt would have given?
So yeah, Matt needs to learn a lesson too.
Now if someone had shouted out on that corner, what reaction do we think Matt would have given?
OilyMechanic
Active Member
Cutting a corner is cutting a corner. Cyclists want the same rights as car drivers, stick to the same rules. Pretty simple huh? A cyclist can cause just as much damage as a car when crashing into someone.
If he didn't get into that situation by being an idiot and moaning at a driver for not driving correctly (when he does the same thing himself) there would be no "assault"
Hip Priest
Veteran
W
What if an old lady or a woman with a pushchair had been crossing left to right? She may have looked right, seen the carriageway was clear, only to have an unsighted cyclist collide with her from the left. I think this shouldbe forwarded to the police. Or instead, maybe we could all grow up and stop nitpicking over non-events.
What if an old lady or a woman with a pushchair had been crossing left to right? She may have looked right, seen the carriageway was clear, only to have an unsighted cyclist collide with her from the left. I think this shouldbe forwarded to the police. Or instead, maybe we could all grow up and stop nitpicking over non-events.
OilyMechanic
Active Member
It would of gone something along these lines, in a squeaky voice.
"No I didn't"
"I have it on camera"
"I'm calling the police for verbal assault"
"I'm sooooo going to post this on cyclechat tonight to get internet points"
OilyMechanic
Active Member
If we were to stop nitpicking over non-events, why is this thread even here?
Except for his continual repetition of the phrase "six of one ..." which if it means anything at all means that Matt was equally to blame. The number "six" and the quantity "half a dozen" are, as I expect you know, equal to each other, and the phrase is therefore generally used when both parties to some interaction are held to be "as bad as each other"
While I'm sure that most or all of us will agree that Matt would have been less likely to escalate the situation had he not e.g. read the car numberplate out, the use of the word "escalate" is itself a honking great clue that the offences and insults occasioned in the first half, wherein Matt impugns the driver's ability to go round corners properly, are not in fact of the same magnitude as those in the second half, where the driver cuts him up and then threatens physical violence against him.
It is of course possible that Linf is perhaps not aware how large the archaic unit "a dozen" is, and is just using the phrase to mean "there was some degree of blame on both sides", but as that is not what the phrase means, this is not how he comes across. Here I can only echo your own advice that "language [...] should be couched very carefully"
